MH17 downed by Russian military missile system, say investigators

[Dalit]

A lot of hot air in this thread.

Nothing will happen. The Russians have done what needed to be done.

The Dutch people who lost a lot of lives don't even care. Some politicians and media outlets have made some fuss, but the people don't even believe the conspiracy against Russia.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

This is centralized, and Ukraine was not deemed dangerous above a certain altitude.

Guess what? They are wrong. S-300 were flying all over the place and those can reach any altitude and they are semi active radar guided and went after everything in the sky. They were stupid to let airliners fly there.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

A lot of hot air in this thread.

Nothing will happen. The Russians have done what needed to be done.

The Dutch people who lost a lot of lives don't even care. Some politicians and media outlets have made some fuss, but the people don't even believe the conspiracy against Russia.

Maybe You should talk to someone outside you local Islamist circle.
You might be able to avoid to commit treason under short periods.

https://www.government.nl/topics/mh...erlands-and-australia-hold-russia-responsible

MH17: The Netherlands and Australia hold Russia responsible
News item | 25-05-2018 | 10:37

The Netherlands and Australia hold Russia responsible for its part in the downing of flight MH17. The government took a decision on this matter, on the proposal of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Stef Blok. Our two countries have informed Russia of their decision.

‘The downing of flight MH17 caused unimaginable suffering,’ said Dutch foreign minister Stef Blok. ‘The government has always said that the truth surrounding the MH17 disaster had to be brought to light and that justice must be achieved for the victims and their next of kin. The Netherlands has the support of the international community in this respect. On the basis of the JIT’s conclusions, the Netherlands and Australia are now convinced that Russia is responsible for the deployment of the Buk installation that was used to down MH17. The government is now taking the next step by formally holding Russia accountable.’

State responsibility comes into play when states fail to uphold the provisions of international law. A state can then be held responsible for breaching one or more of those provisions. This is the legal avenue that the Netherlands and Australia have now chosen to pursue. Both countries hold Russia responsible for its part in the downing of flight MH17.

Holding a state responsible is a complex legal process, and there are several ways to do this. The Netherlands and Australia today asked Russia to enter into talks aimed at finding a solution that would do justice to the tremendous suffering and damage caused by the downing of MH17. A possible next step is to present the case to an international court or organisation for their judgment.

Holding Russia accountable for its part in the downing of flight MH17 on the basis of international law is a course of action that is separate from the criminal investigation and any prosecution and trial of the perpetrators of the downing of flight MH17. The investigation by the JIT continues, and it is up to the Public Prosecution Service to decide if and when individuals will be identified as suspects and indicted.

‘We call on Russia to accept its responsibility and cooperate fully with the process to establish the truth and achieve justice for the victims of flight MH17 and their next of kin,’ said the minister.

 

[Dalit]

Maybe You should talk to someone outside you local Islamist circle.

https://www.government.nl/topics/mh...erlands-and-australia-hold-russia-responsible

MH17: The Netherlands and Australia hold Russia responsible
News item | 25-05-2018 | 10:37

The Netherlands and Australia hold Russia responsible for its part in the downing of flight MH17. The government took a decision on this matter, on the proposal of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Stef Blok. Our two countries have informed Russia of their decision.

‘The downing of flight MH17 caused unimaginable suffering,’ said Dutch foreign minister Stef Blok. ‘The government has always said that the truth surrounding the MH17 disaster had to be brought to light and that justice must be achieved for the victims and their next of kin. The Netherlands has the support of the international community in this respect. On the basis of the JIT’s conclusions, the Netherlands and Australia are now convinced that Russia is responsible for the deployment of the Buk installation that was used to down MH17. The government is now taking the next step by formally holding Russia accountable.’

State responsibility comes into play when states fail to uphold the provisions of international law. A state can then be held responsible for breaching one or more of those provisions. This is the legal avenue that the Netherlands and Australia have now chosen to pursue. Both countries hold Russia responsible for its part in the downing of flight MH17.

Holding a state responsible is a complex legal process, and there are several ways to do this. The Netherlands and Australia today asked Russia to enter into talks aimed at finding a solution that would do justice to the tremendous suffering and damage caused by the downing of MH17. A possible next step is to present the case to an international court or organisation for their judgment.

Holding Russia accountable for its part in the downing of flight MH17 on the basis of international law is a course of action that is separate from the criminal investigation and any prosecution and trial of the perpetrators of the downing of flight MH17. The investigation by the JIT continues, and it is up to the Public Prosecution Service to decide if and when individuals will be identified as suspects and indicted.

‘We call on Russia to accept its responsibility and cooperate fully with the process to establish the truth and achieve justice for the victims of flight MH17 and their next of kin,’ said the minister.

LOL this isn't Breivik's forum.

I live here. I was born here. I know more about Dutch sentiment. You can quote one sh!tty source from the internet, but it doesn't represent the sentiment of the entire Dutch people.

You are nothing, but a liar. The ordinary Dutch people do not care about the blame game against Russia. Apart from a few silly media houses and some politicians no one gives a rats @$$. Scream and shout harder. Someone might hear you.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

LOL this isn't Breivik's forum.

I live here. I was born here. I know more about Dutch sentiment. You can quote one sh!tty source from the internet, but it doesn't represent the sentiment of the entire Dutch people.

You are nothing, but a liar. The ordinary Dutch people do not care about the blame game against Russia. Apart from a few silly media houses and some politicians no one gives a rats @$$. Scream and shout harder. Someone might hear you.

”One shitty source” happens to be the government of the country you live in.
So spoke the traitor.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

https://amp.smh.com.au/world/europe...ho2.html?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral

How an online purchase helped find the Russian blamed for downing MH17
26 May 2018 — 12:04pm
Washington: A mysterious man wanted in connection with the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine in 2014 appears to be a high-level Russian military intelligence officer, an investigation by a team of reporting outlets has found.

The reporting team, made up of the McClatchy media group owner of the Miami Herald, and investigative websites Bellingcat in London and The Insider in Moscow, identified the man, previously known only by his call sign Orion, as Oleg Vladimirovich Ivannikov.

An image of Buk-Telar missile launching system probably taken on July 17, 2014, in the town of Makeevka, Ukraine. The JIT presumes that the picture contains the BUK-Telar responsible for downing MH17.

Photo: JIT/AP
Information about Orion has been long sought by a five-nation Joint Investigation Team conducting a criminal probe of the tragedy.

An independent investigation has named Russian military adviser Oleg Vladimirovich Ivannikov as a person of interest in the downing of MH17.

Photo: Bellingcat
That body, citing several unique markers on photographs of a Russian BUK launcher taken in the border area near the wreck, on Thursday formally accused a specific division - the 53rd anti-aircraft brigade from Kursk - of the Russian military of bringing down the passenger aircraft, killing all 298 aboard. The head of The Netherlands' National Investigation Service called on witnesses to help identify those who gave orders.

"Who formed part of the crew? With what instruction did they set out? Who was responsible for the operational deployment of this" missile launcher, Wilbert Paulissen asked.

The Russian Defence Ministry said that "Russian BUKs never crossed Ukraine border."

The July 17, 2014, missile strike on a plane full of passengers from 17 countries flying above 30,000 feet from Amsterdam to the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur shocked the world. Ukrainian leaders blamed Russia or ethnic Russian separatists. Thirty-eight Australians and Australian residents were among the 298 people killed.

The reconstructed wreckage of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17

Photo: AP
Since the five-nation team hopes to bring criminal charges, identifying the chain of command in the plane's downing is vital. Made up of representatives from the Netherlands, Ukraine, Malaysia, Belgium and Australia, the team did not know Orion's identity on Thursday when pinning the missile strike on Russia.

Orion was captured on mobile phone intercepts with a semi-retired three-star Russian major general who used the call sign Delfin on the day of, and in the days after, the shootdown. A report published last December by the collaborating news outlets identified Nikolai Federovich Tkachev as Delfin, the general and one of two senior officers who oversaw the movements of the BUK rocket launcher.

In the intercepts, Orion and Delfin discuss transport of equipment such as trailers across the border without mentioning BUKs. Orion complains that the military men bringing the trailers were using a map of Ukraine from 1982.

Australian Federal Police and their dutch counterparts search the MH17 crash site for human remains in 2014.

Photo: Kate Geraghty
However, the day after the shootdown, the Ukrainian security service published an intercept dated two days before the incident in which Orion explicitly says "we got a BUK now ... so we start shooting the hell out of their planes."

When a member of the reporting team called Ivannikov for comment, a relative said to call back later in the day. But Ivannikov refused to come to the phone later.

Reporting partners have determined with a high degree of probability that Orion is the Russian citizen Ivannikov, born in 1967 in what was East Germany, the son of a decorated Soviet major general.

Ivannikov's true name has remained hidden in part because, like other Russian officers in the GRU military intelligence unit, he does not operate under his true identity.

Donetsk People's Republic sniper Eugene Lukovkin stands among pilots' bags where he witnessed the front section of MH17 crashing and found the pilots bodies.

Photo: Kate Geraghty
Instead, Ivannikov appears to have been using an alternate identity: Andrey Ivanovich Laptev. Under that assumed name, he helped lead an uprising of ethnic Russians in South Ossetia, a breakaway region of the former Soviet republic of Georgia. He was effectively part of what would become a private Russian shadow army that later fought in Ukraine and even later in Syria, where they took a strike in February from US warplanes.

Several English-language publications and books reference a man known as Andrey Laptev as having first been the chief of staff for a South Ossetian security council from 2004 to 2006 and then until 2008 serving as "defence minister" for separatist forces in the self-proclaimed Republic of South Ossetia.

Yet Laptev appears in no photographs from the breakaway region, though the conflict stretched over more than four years. He has virtually no internet or social-media footprint under that name.

That invisibility is one clue to Laptev's GRU connection. Russian military personnel who've left conflict zones are generally promoted, appearing in military publications or on websites receiving awards, promotions or teaching positions at military academies.

About the time Laptev/Ivannikov was last linked to South Ossetia in 2013, ethnic Russian separatist activity in eastern Ukraine flared. And that's where Orion, or Andrey Ivanovich, came into view.

In September 2016, the Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team released what it said were telephone intercepts of two Russian speakers - Delfin and Orion - and asked for the public's help in learning their true identities.

The Russian newspaper Novaya Gazeta in July 2015 concluded that based on interviews with former separatists, Orion was a Russian military adviser. And since such advisers don't operate in war theaters under their real names, it has been assumed Andrey Ivanovich was an alias.

The break in identifying Orion came through mobile phone data, obtained by Bellingcat, that contained the mobile number Orion used in one of the intercepts. There were "hits" for this number in two publicly available phone-sharing apps. (Bellingcat's longer report provides greater detail.)

In one app, the number appeared under "Andrey Ivanovich-GRU from Husky". In another app, the same number appeared under the name "Ivannikov". Bellingcat and The Insider later identified a special operations unit of Russian separatists in Ukraine using the call sign "Huski", for the dog breed popular in Russia.

Additionally, the number associated with "Ivannikov" appears in an online telephone database and on a now-defunct e-commerce website that left its customer and order data exposed. On that website, the same phone number appears in a customer profile of "Oleg", who ordered an "elevation training mask".

A reporter from The Insider went to the delivery address listed on the order; it didn't exist. But the road continued under another name, and the street number corresponded to the entrance to the Main Intelligence Directorate of the GRU.

That Moscow address - Khoroshevskoye Shosse 76, Khodinka - is the same one listed in sanctions paperwork issued by the US Treasury Department on December 29, 2016, as part of the Obama administration's retaliation for Russia's meddling in the US elections.

The reporting partners also traced the same mobile phone number to a dwelling across from a military intelligence institute; the structure appears on the social-media profile of one of Ivannikov's relatives living at the same address.

Oleg Vladimirovich Ivannikov has been named as a person of interest in the downing of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17.

Photo: Bellingcat
Automobile registration records dating back 15 years from Rostov-on-Don, almost 1000 kilometres straight south of Moscow, helped to confirm other key details about Ivannikov's past. Passport records in Russia show he graduated in 1988 from the Kiev Military Aviation Engineering Academy in what today is Ukraine.

Other documents obtained by the reporting team show Ivannikov got a post-graduate degree in 1990 from the academy's rocket division and in 2008, after leaving South Ossetia, wrote a PhD thesis about information warfare at the Southern Federal University in Rostov-on-Don.

The reporting team also secured two photos of Ivannikov, one from 2012 and one from his 2003 passport application.

In the reporting team's previous stories, intercepts were compared against videos or secretly recorded conversations to determine high likelihoods of a match. In the case of Ivannikov, the University of Colorado, Denver's Centre for Media Forensics determined intercepts were too short or too noisy for proper comparison.

Among the factors pointing to Laptev/Ivannikov, however, is the fact that he has an unusually high-pitched voice that can make it difficult to tell if a man or woman is talking.

The Insider confirmed with a former member of the breakaway South Ossetian government that the man they knew as Laptev had an unusually high-pitched voice. Another source in the region, who insisted on anonymity fearing reprisals, confirmed a photo of Ivannikov was the man he knew as Laptev.

In addition, Ivannikov prides himself as an academic. In July 2012, under his real name, Ivannikov became a director of the Russia-Caucus Research Centre, part of the International Institute of the Newly Established States.

That Moscow-based think-tank publishes papers supportive of Russia's sphere of influence over its many neighbours. Ivannikov has published more than 20 papers, which often cite his role as a "military expert". Another director of the centre was a Pole arrested at home for spying for Russia.

As the reporting team neared conclusion of this report, references to Ivannikov on the think-tank's website, along with his articles, suddenly disappeared. An archived index of his writing can still be accessed.

A former high-level Kremlin official, demanding anonymity for fear of the Kremlin's long reach, told McClatchy the tale of Orion/Laptev/Ivannikov should help open eyes about how Russia pursues its interests abroad.

"People in the West just don't have a clue," said the former official.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

IMO rebels did it with a captured Buk. There are tons of Buks in eastern Ukraine. Easily captured by rebels in the early stage of the war. A 1986 missile is pretty old and unlikely to be in active Russian service by 2014.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

IMO rebels did it with a captured Buk. There are tons of Buks in eastern Ukraine. Easily captured by rebels in the early stage of the war. A 1986 missile is pretty old and unlikely to be in active Russian service by 2014.

You have argued that before, and then you were shown such a missile on a parade in Russia in 2015. You still keep on producing the same BS.
If the Rebels had captured many BUKs, why would they jump up and down and congratulate themselves for suddenly having a BUK, right after a Russian BUK had been transported into Rebel territory?
Your opinion, without any sources, against massive evidence that Russia supplied the missile.
That this happens to mimic the last remaining argument in Russias crumbling defense is a pure coincidence?

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

You have argued that before, and then you were shown such a missile on a parade in Russia in 2015. You still keep on producing the same BS.
If the Rebels had captured many BUKs, why would they jump up and down and congratulate themselves for suddenly having a BUK, right after a Russian BUK had been transported into Rebel territory?
Your opinion, without any sources, against massive evidence that Russia supplied the missile.
That this happens to mimic the last remaining argument in Russias crumbling defense is a pure coincidence?

Parading something does not mean using something in combat. Parade units are typically reserve units, not active units. In the 2014 Crimea operation Russia used Mi-35M and BTR-82A from the 2000s, not Mi-24 and BTR-80 from the 1980s. In combat in Syria Russia does not use 1980s weapons, only the latest weapons. In combat typically the latest weapons are used to optimize combat efficiency, even if there are old weapons in service in the army, they are rarely used in combat if at all. You don't see America army using 1980s TOW in Syria. They only use TOW ITAS and Javelin from the 2000s. Sure, every army has some old weapons, but using them in combat in extremely rare, even if they are paraded from time to time.

Russia army using a 1986 missile in 2014 would have a chance of less than 1 percent. Sure, it's possible, but extremely unlikely. If they did use a Buk, over 99 percent chance it would have been a Buk M2 from the 2000s, not a 1986 Buk. Buk M2 is used by Russia army and Syria army. Syria army Buk is Buk M2, bought in the 2000s. Syria army does not have any Buk other than Buk M2. By 2014 just about all the earlier Buks in Russia army were replaced by Buk M2. Maybe rebels bought an old Buk from Russia army. Maybe rebels captured an old Buk from Ukraine army. Maybe rebels who shot the Buk were defected Ukraine army. Who cares? All we know is it was an old Buk build in the USSR in 1986.

If the Rebels had captured many BUKs, why would they jump up and down and congratulate themselves for suddenly having a BUK, right after a Russian BUK had been transported into Rebel territory?

Where's the evidence a Russian Buk was transported to rebels?

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

It is most probable that the 1986 Buk was shot by defected or former Ukraine army units. These folks are extremely pro Russia, they are ethnically Russian, and they pretty much hate Ukraine. In Crimea tens of thousands of Ukraine army soldiers including S-300 air defense units joined Russia army in February 2014, causing a bloodless takeover of Crimea for Russia. When Ukraine was created by Communists in 1922, a large portion, especially in the east, are majority ethnic Russian, the demarcation of Ukraine Russia border in 1922 was done hastily and incorrectly, leading to future trouble.

There might have been some communication between defected or former Ukraine army units and Russia intelligence, but IMO if Russia army shot a Buk, it would have been Buk M2, not a 1986 Buk. Syria army only has Buk M2. Russia frontline units in 2014 only has Buk M2.

Buk has a shelf life of 25 years. Past 25 years it becomes dangerous to use. Russia army Buks made in 1986 would have been deposed in 2011. This proves the Buk made in 1986 is from Ukraine army or former Ukraine army, because Ukraine cannot make air defense missiles so they cannot afford to depose Buks that are past their shelf life.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

You all say Russia army shot down MH17. Where's your evidence? Which Russian have you interviewed? You are all BS investigators. Shame on you. Russia army uses 2000s Buk M2, not 1980s Buk. Russia army didn't use 1980s Mi-24 and BTR-80 when Russia invaded Crimea. Russia army used 2000s Mi-35M and BTR-82A when Russia invaded Crimea. It was rebels AKA former Ukraine army that shot down MH17. Go ahead and blabber your Goebbels. Repeating a lie a million times does not make it true.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

You all say Russia army shot down MH17. Where's your evidence? Which Russian have you interviewed? You are all BS investigators. Shame on you. Russia army uses 2000s Buk M2, not 1980s Buk. Russia army didn't use 1980s Mi-24 and BTR-80 when Russia invaded Crimea. Russia army used 2000s Mi-35M and BTR-82A when Russia invaded Crimea. It was rebels AKA former Ukraine army that shot down MH17. Go ahead and blabber your Goebbels. Repeating a lie a million times does not make it true.

Your Russian Masters tell You what to say, and You repeat it.
No credible sources presented. Russia ARE using older BUKs, which has been shown to You but conveniently ignored.
The Russians do not throw things away. In the cold war, the Soviets planned to field plenty of Category C divisions equipped with T-55s.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

No credible sources presented. Russia ARE using older BUKs, which has been shown to You but conveniently ignored.

You have no evidence Russia army used a 1980s Buk to shoot down MH17. You make the claim. You back it up. Russia frontline units have 2000s Buk M2, not 1980s Buk. Only parade and reserve units possibly have 1980s Buk. Buk warranty is 25 years. Past 25 years missiles are dangerous to use. That's why armies that make missiles routinely dispose of old missiles. Past 25 years frontline units dispose older Buks replaced by Buk M2. You have no evidence Russia army used a 1986 Buk instead of a 2000s Buk M2 in 2014.

The Russians do not throw things away. In the cold war, the Soviets planned to field plenty of Category C divisions equipped with T-55s.

Frontline units are the first units that get new weapons. Frontline units don't use old weapons. Only reserve units have old weapons. Russia army used Mi-35M and BTR-82A instead of Mi-24 and BTR-80 when they invaded Crimea. Russia army used Su-35S and Su-30SM instead of Su-27 and Su-30 when they fought ISIS.

Show me an example when America army uses old weapons instead of new weapons in battle. Do they use 1980s TOW in Syria?

Show me an example when Russia army uses old weapons instead of new weapons in battle. Do they use 1980s Konkurs in Syria?

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Your Russian Masters tell You what to say, and You repeat it.

Name calling now you little fagot. I'm not Russian nor am I obsessed about Russia like you are. You white people sort your own problems out and stay out of Asia.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Just because something is paraded doesn't mean it's in active service. T-34 is paraded all the time. I don't see Russia army using T-34 in battle these days. I don't see Russia army even using 1980s T-72 in Syria. I see Russia army only using 2000s T-90A in Syria.

Russia frontline units have 2000s Buk M2, not 1980s Buk 1. Get that through your head. The 1986 Buk 1 was shot by either Ukraine army or former Ukraine army, not by Russia army.